In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

I may become a Libertarian yet !

calamitywoodcalamitywood Member Posts: 939 ✭✭✭✭
edited October 2004 in General Discussion
Some time back either Highball or Pickenup sent me a link to the Libertarian Party web site. Since that time I have carefully studied and considered all that site had to say about Libertarians. I must say I am very nearly convinced to become one and that is saying quite a lot because i have never been affiliated with any political party. I am struggling with their stand on drugs but they do have some convincing arguements there. I just thought i would drop a thread to let them know I am still interested in this political option. [:)]

Comments

  • HighballHighball Member Posts: 15,755
    edited November -1
    calamitywood; [:D]

    One doesn't become a Libertarian because one agrees that all their platform is rational.
    One becomes a Libertarian because the two major parties are Morally Bankrupt..engaged in tearing this country down and amassing power unto themselves.

    One does it in the desperate hope they will get the message in time..before the damage is irreverseable....
  • calamitywoodcalamitywood Member Posts: 939 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
  • gunnut505gunnut505 Member Posts: 10,290
    edited November -1
    Just something about their open border policy that bothers me....

    As far as the "other" parties being morally bankrupt, and other excuses; the only way to make your voice heard is to vote for anyone that supports TERM LIMITS! Teddy Kennedy is one of the most egregious offenders, having been "voted" into office in '63! You can't tell me that Massachussetts citizens willingly put that fat, drunk orifice in office every election since! John McCain has been there waaaay too long as well. Joe Biden doesn't represent any constituency other than his own, and that blowhard Daschle, and mealy-mouthed racists Dingell, Rangel, Clinton & that goofy broad from Kalifornia all hate our country and its' citizens.
    As long as those relics continue to exert power over our political system; we will never be truly FREE.
    And as long as the fringe element support third party candidates with no hope of gaining office; there will never be term limits.

    "Qui non est hodie cras minus aptus erit" --OVID
  • TheBrassManTheBrassMan Member Posts: 3,807 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I am voting for the Libertarian Candidates in our state elections.
    Also one that is running for federal office.
    I am thinking after the elections to change my party to Libertarian.
    I like what they stand for.


    Nowhere in the U.S. Constitution does it state: "Seperation of Church and State".

    "Those who beat their guns into plow shares; will plow for those who don't."

    62038332.jpgawcountdown.gif

    "Isaiah 5:20 ?Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!"
  • LowriderLowrider Member Posts: 6,587
    edited November -1
    You can't become a librarian unless you know the Dewey Decimal System.

    What...? You said "Libertarian...?" Never mind.

    Lord Lowrider the Loquacious.

    Member:Secret Select Society of Suave Stylish Smoking Jackets

    She was only a fisherman's daughter,
    But when she saw my rod she reeled.
  • pickenuppickenup Member Posts: 22,844 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    About drugs. While this is not ALL there is to it.
    Quote is taken from Badnarik's site.

    quote: each state would choose its own drug policy, just as each chose its own alcohol policy when alcohol Prohibition was repealed.

    You see, they want to leave it up to each STATE to set it's own policies. NOT the "federal" government. (Most states have policies in place already.) Downsizing the federal government is one of the platforms of the Libertarians. Giving the power back to the states, where it belongs. The idea is NOT to just legalize all drugs, giving them away to kids on the street. (as so many claim is their platform) Each state would set up it's own method of distribution, and set taxes on them.

    (While not on their web site, I would think that the tax, going to support the "medical care" side of this, would be a good way to go. Because as we all know, it is in some people`s nature to be abusive, be it alcohol, tobacco, drugs, etc)

    Immigration,
    They are for LEGAL immigration (albeit more open) but again LEGAL immigration. Allowing LEGAL peaceful immigrants to enter the US, after an inspection to make sure they are not terrorist or criminals. You know, the kind of LEGAL immigration that has played a MAJOR role in the development of this, the greatest country in the world. Who reading this, has relatives (that at some point) were not immigrants?

    Some people like the direction the "two" parties are taking this country, some don't.
    Vote accordingly.

    The gene pool needs chlorine.
  • rogue_robrogue_rob Member Posts: 7,033 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    didnt Rosie O'donnell and Ellen Degeneris say that you COULDN'T "become" a libertarian, that you were born one?

    It just takes guts to admit it!! My hat is off to you!![:D][:D]

    jumpmaster.bmp
  • hughbetchahughbetcha Member Posts: 7,801 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Lowrider
    You can't become a librarian unless you know the Dewey Decimal System.

    What...? You said "Libertarian...?" Never mind.




    Lowrider you SOB you stole my joke! I thought it up myself, it was an original and you stole it!
  • HighballHighball Member Posts: 15,755
    edited November -1
    And quote: as long as the fringe element support third party candidates with no hope of gaining office; there will never be term limits

    The fringe element in America today is the supporters of the major parties.NONE of you are the solid middle of America..supporters of the Constitution.

    I must relunctantly come to this conclusion..watching the people you unwaveringly and devoutly support spit on that document daily...
  • calamitywoodcalamitywood Member Posts: 939 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    i need to learn to cut and paste but yes pickenup i do see what you are saying and feel better about it. I had read before about the states making their own drug laws but it got lost in the sawdust of my mind. At any rate I am becoming more persuaded everyday and i like what i am reading thanks for the information guys
  • flat8flat8 Member Posts: 887 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Highball

    calamitywood; [:D]

    One doesn't become a Libertarian because one agrees that all their platform is rational.
    One becomes a Libertarian because the two major parties are Morally Bankrupt..engaged in tearing this country down and amassing power unto themselves.

    One does it in the desperate hope they will get the message in time..before the damage is irreverseable....





    Too late . . .

    As for the drug issue, funny that we didn't have a nation full of junkies prior to the federal "drug war." Let me ask you this . . . do you do heroin? If not, is it because it is illegal? No, most likely you are not shooting up right now because you know it will destroy your life. People are smart like that . . and they don't need the feds stamping all over the 4th Ammendment to keep them off dope.
  • Ray BRay B Member Posts: 11,822
    edited November -1
    The war on drugs could be easily won- all the lawmakers need is enuf spine to legalize them- and let those that want to ruin their life, do so. People would become a member of 1 of three groups- those that chose not to use them; those that self medicated themselves responsibly, and had few negative effects; and those that abused drugs and in short order died from them. The second group would likely be very small as people went from the middle to one extreme or the other. since the drugs were legal the price would be very low, and for this reason, politicians will never approve it, because it would put organized crime out of this business practically over-night as well as reducing the drug related crime to virtually zero. Organized crime wants drugs to be illegal, so they will have a real markup as well has limiting competition.
  • gunnut505gunnut505 Member Posts: 10,290
    edited November -1
    I think you missed my point about term limits; Dem, Rep, Ind, Lib, makes no difference! 8 years for "Representatives", 12 for "Senators".
    Period. No long-term money-grubbing, corrupt, elitist, abusive career politicians looking out for their futures instead of the Country's.

    "Qui non est hodie cras minus aptus erit" --OVID
  • TheBrassManTheBrassMan Member Posts: 3,807 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    What is the link to the Libertarian site.
    I would like to check it out.


    Nowhere in the U.S. Constitution does it state: "Seperation of Church and State".

    "Those who beat their guns into plow shares; will plow for those who don't."

    62038332.jpgawcountdown.gif

    "Isaiah 5:20 ?Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!"
  • kaliforniankalifornian Member Posts: 475 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Welcome to the fold, calamitywood!
    I agree with pickenup's assessment of the party stance.

    Regarding Drugs:
    The party feels that the feds should have no say in state drug laws. Many individual party members (myself included) feel that the if drugs were regulated and taxed rather than outlawed, the newly legal drugs would be cheaper and thus would not be a source of illicit wealth and arms for drug pushers and gangs. I think many of us like the idea of not spending a fortune in tax dollars on finding and jailing recreational users when that money could be better spent on other issues. After all, any crime they commit while on drugs is crime in and of itself, and if they screw up we have other laws to prosecute them with.

    Here's a couple of quotes from the Libertarian Presidential Candidate's web site:
    quote:By Michael Badnarik

    The federal government has no constitutional authority to interfere with state drug policies. When the federal government outlawed alcohol, it required a constitutional amendment to do so. ...

    On a fundamental level, Libertarians believe that it is the unalienable and constitutional right of individuals to medicate themselves and choose for themselves what to put into their bodies, as long as they live up to the consequences of their actions.


    Regarding Open Borders:
    Libertarians are not for "open borders" but rather the legal immigration of peaceful non-dangerous immigrants via carefully controlled customs check points. Here's another quote from the libertarian presidential candidate's web site:

    quote:By Michael Badnarik
    This does not mean, however, that the national defense must be sacrificed to some naive conception of "open borders." The right to enter the United States is not the same as the right to enter the United States in contravention of its legitimate interest in securing itself against those who would do it harm.


    The links:
    http://www.lp.org/ (National Site)
    http://www.ca.lp.org/ (California Site)
    http://badnarik.org/ (Michael Badnarik, Presidential Candidate's Site)


    If you are still on the fence and would like some more convincing, I've also written a couple of articles that might interest you:

    http://lestdarknessfall.blogspot.com/2004/10/2004-presidential-candidates.html
    This one is on the 2004 Presidential Candidates and why people should vote 3rd party, perferrably Libertarian.

    http://www.lestdarknessfall.com/Pages/WieldPoliticalPower.htm
    This one is on wielding political power and the perils of our two party system.

    http://lestdarknessfall.com
  • HighballHighball Member Posts: 15,755
    edited November -1
    I understand your position on term limits.

    However..we need an INTELLIGENT ellectorate..not another law.Were there enough people in this country intelligent enough to actually be ALLOWED to vote..they would understand what longivety in office does to a candidate.

    They would understand exactly WHY the Founders desired 'civilian legislators'..why it should NEVER be a 'career'..
  • calamitywoodcalamitywood Member Posts: 939 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    really great responses and thanks for the new links. I will read them all. by the way that link that was requested is www.lp.org/issues/
Sign In or Register to comment.